Alastair Cook: A magnificent series. Cook led from the front with three high-class centuries in the first three Tests and ensured that, even after the loss at Ahmedabad, his squad remained positive and disciplined. Inheriting a divided, losing team, he instilled a no-excuses culture and has met every challenge with calm determination. He shrugged off two poor decisions in the final Test to join an illustrious list of successful England captains in India that now reads Jardine, Greig, Gower and Cook. It was, all in all, a deeply impressive response to a potentially daunting first series officially at the helm.

9

James Anderson: Credited as "the major difference" between the sides by MS Dhoni, Anderson enjoyed an exceptional series which is not fully reflected in the statistics. The 12 wickets he took - that's eight more than the next most successful seamer on either side - on pitches offering little, demonstrated a mastery of skills that few can match. He may not match the potency of Dale Steyn, but no seamer has taken more wickets in 2012 than Anderson's 48 and, while it has not been England's finest year, he has remained a beacon of reliability.

8.5

Matt Prior: Selfless and reliable, Prior finished with a batting average of just over 50 and was easily the better of the two keepers on display in difficult conditions. Capable of rebuilding the innings or adding momentum, Prior played the spin as well as anyone and set the tone for a fielding performance that was one of the key differences between the sides. Is there a better batsman-keeper in the Test game at present?

Graeme Swann: The equal top wicket-taker in the series. Swann, unhampered by the elbow problem that plagued him throughout the summer, bowled with control, variation and skill to trouble batsmen renowned as good players of spin. He also batted effectively - he finished the series with a batting average of 32.66 - and remained reliable in the slips.

Monty Panesar: Described by Cook as "a captain's dream", Panesar often operated as a stock bowler and provided control when conditions offered little and threat when offered turn or bounce. His extra pace proved crucial at Mumbai, where he extracted turn and lift not achieved by India's spinners and claimed 11 wickets in the match. He then conceded only 81 runs in 52 overs on a desperately slow wicket in Nagpur to help England achieve a draw. Despite it all, however, it is quite hard to see where Panesar's next Test may be.

8

Kevin Pietersen: It's no longer hard being him. Fully embraced back into the England fold, Pietersen recovered from a diffident performance at Ahmedabad with a truly great innings in Mumbai that played a huge role in turning the tide of this series. Cheerful and effective in the field, he was noticeably more engaged with his colleagues and welcoming and helpful to new players such as Joe Root. Whatever went before, few could dispute that the England side are far stronger for Pietersen's inclusion.

Steven Finn: Increasingly impressive in the one Test he played, Finn loses marks - perhaps unfairly - only because of his unavailability through injury for three of the games. After suffering a thigh strain in the first warm-up game - a serious blow to England's plans - he suffered a back injury in Kolkata and returned home early. He looked far more effective than Stuart Broad or Tim Bresnan in the brief time he was available, though, and after dismissing MS Dhoni with a brute of a short ball in the first innings in Kolkata, produced a super spell of reverse swing in India's second innings to ensure England remained on top. If he remains fit, England have a gem.

Joe Root: Root justified his surprise selection for the Nagpur Test with a patient contribution that rebuilt England's first innings when it appeared to be falling away. He also demonstrated some pleasing strokes when given the opportunity in the second innings. It would be unwise to read too much into one performance on an unusual surface, but Root did appear to have the technique and temperament to prosper at this level. We are going to hear a lot more about Joe Root.

Jonathan Trott: Started poorly and ended at his wonderfully stubborn best. Dismissed by two good balls in Ahmedabad, he looked devoid of confidence in Mumbai, but fought back with doughty innings in Kolkata and, in particular, Nagpur where his century secured the series victory. He also looked increasingly comfortable standing at slip to the spinners and finished with five catches.

7

Nick Compton: A solid if unspectacular start. Compton helped Cook post four successive 50 partnerships ensuring decent platforms for England, but he registered only one half-century personally. While he proved his ability to occupy the crease, some doubt remains about his ability to press on and dominate. But he has surely earned further opportunities in New Zealand and can feel satisfied at playing his part in alien conditions in an historic victory.

6

Ian Bell: A series he salvaged at the last. It started with his bizarre dismissal at Ahmedabad - trying to hit his first delivery over the top - and ended with a century at Nagpur which, flat pitch or not, began with his team under genuine pressure and helped to seal the series. There were other bright moments: his positive innings eased any nerves in the small run chase in Kolkata and he took a fine catch to dismiss Cheteshwar Pujara in Nagpur and produced a direct hit to run out the same batsmen in the second innings in Kolkata. His average in India after three tours - 27.07 - remains disappointing for one so gifted, but Bell remains as likely as most to score crucial runs against Australia next year.

5

Jonny Bairstow: A tour he may reflect on as a learning experience. Bairstow had only one innings in which he fell victim to a poor decision, though he would accept the stroke, playing across the spin, was somewhat naïve. It was encouraging to witness his warm congratulations for Joe Root when the latter was chosen ahead of him for Nagpur.

4.5

Samit Patel: A somewhat unfortunate series. Picked as second spinner in Ahmedabad, his left-arm spin looked increasingly limited - his only wicket came with a full toss - and, once Monty Panesar was recalled, largely irrelevant. He failed to compensate with the bat, averaging just 17.25 in three Tests, but enjoyed no luck. He was unfortunate to be adjudged lbw in both innings in Ahmedabad and engineered the run-out of Virender Sehwag in Kolkata with an excellent chase and diving stop. It is hard to imagine a scenario where he will play Test cricket again.

3.5

Tim Bresnan: A sad series for a wholehearted performer who seems, through no fault of his own, unable to attain the high levels of performance he once could. Bresnan was dropped after an insipid performance at Ahmedabad and, recalled in Nagpur because of injuries to Broad and Finn, fared no better. It was not just that his pace was down, but that he struggled to maintain the nagging line and length he possessed in the past. He finished wicketless in the series and may have to prove himself anew if he is to extend his Test career.

3

Stuart Broad: Hampered by illness and injury, Broad never looked at his best in the first two Tests, was dropped for the third and sent home early with a recurrence of his heel injury by the time the fourth started. Unable to take a wicket, he also leaked 4.36 runs per over and sometimes cut a forlorn figure. Only he could say if he really approached this tour in the requisite positive frame of mind but the signs were ambiguous at best.

... echoing the last Ashes tour it is led by Jimmy and Cookie. Both times there really was space for two men of the series. I still think Root is a high mark for 1 Test but otherwise it looks ok.

aka-ra
on December 20, 2012, 10:02 GMT

@Andrew Bell Did you see Cook's decisions in the final test? He wasn't out in either of them. The caught behind missed the edge by a couple of inches!

on December 20, 2012, 8:21 GMT

how can you give 9.5 to someone who made 1 and 13 in the final test?

Meety
on December 20, 2012, 3:15 GMT

Hard to guage much on ratings, they are so subjective, but I would say that Cook had to be pretty close to 10/10. In the 1st test defeat, that 2nd innings (IMO with hindsight), turned the series. What was supposed to be a massive flogging from India - ended up being comfortable rather than a massacre & the momentum was halted. I'd put Panesar above Swann in head to head battles, so being scored even over 4 tests is okay. Dunno how Root & Finn get 7.5s for one match in a 4-test series? I thought Finn's 1st innings bowling was quite loose.
== == ==
Said a few times, 6mths out before this series, I would of said 3-1 India, just because of the alien-like qualities Oz & Eng would consider the conditions to be like. The England planning (Flower & co take a bow), was Ashes-like in its brilliance (except the Panesar no-show in the 1st Test). India were like a boxer who has one punch in them & then nothing. England absorbed it lost the initial round then pummelled India every whichway!

no_point_chasing_the_wide_ones
on December 19, 2012, 17:48 GMT

regards the ABdV vs Prior debate, both average 48.something in test matches since ABdV took over the gloves from Boucher at the beginning of the SA-Eng series in the summer (gbqdgi - check your facts!!!! instead of guessing... and while you're at it, get a proper profile name as apposed to randomly bashing on the keyboard). and based on comments here, most seem to agree AB is a better batsman - overall stats support that. regards glovework I think it is more difficult to categorically state one is better than the other. Prior is a top keeper in top form, but I can't remember AB doing much wrong or making any howlers in the 2 series he has kept. And he has had glowing references from respectable ex-plyers like Healy and Gilchrist. So I don't think it is as clear cut as some of you suggest. I think they are evenly matched as keeper-batsmen, and I certainly know which of them I would pick if selecting a side... the one born in SA!!!! fancy that, 2 best keepers in the world both from SA!

R_U_4_REAL_NICK
on December 19, 2012, 15:48 GMT

It was a great series for England, regardless of the typically laughable scoring at the end of it all. Bowlers are key to tests, so I'm glad to see so many bowlers up there in the top half for a change. Samit Patel was the biggest disappointment for me; he did so well in the warm-ups with both bat and ball, and then floundered in the real deal. Broad should not have even been brought to India, and must have lied or something about his fitness. It's definately looking more positive for England, and I just hope they've learned a lot from this tour and realise that bowlers like Magic Monty are a must in these conditions, REGARDLESS OF BATTING/FIELDING SKILLS!

Valavan
on December 19, 2012, 13:49 GMT

@Dobell, why so much biased Cook,Swann should get 10 and Bresnan 1.5 and Broad 0.5, do you admite Broad and Bresnan. cricinfo please publish

JG2704
on December 19, 2012, 9:29 GMT

@edgie on (December 18 2012, 10:39 AM GMT) How has AB averaged as a batsman in tests when keeping wicket?

@Ali_Chaudhary on (December 18 2012, 10:41 AM GMT) And Ajmal wasn't up to much the last time Pak toured England but does that have any bearing to what he's doing now? The marks are for this series alone - end of

@ ravikb on (December 18 2012, 11:16 AM GMT) Swings and roundabouts. He scored what he scored with one or 2 going for him and a couple going against him so it's kind of levelled itself out don't you think?

CricketingStargazer
on December 19, 2012, 9:19 GMT

Funny thing, @GrindAR, is that that a different tune was being sung during the warm-ups and after the 1st Test. How did India suddenly turn from being a team of superstars who would win 4-0 without breaking sweat into a bunch of neos who were unworthy opponents? I seem to remember seeing most of the same faces in the Indian team through the entire series. I suspect that guys like Sehway, Gambhir, Tendulkar, Dhoni, Yuvraj, Harbhajan, Zaheer, etc would be a bit miffed at the "young and inexperienced" tag and where players were changed it was usually down to players being dropped for poor performances. Similarly, Ravi Ashwin was totted as one of the fastest bowlers ever to 50 Test wickets... it's not England's fault that his ability suddenly deserted him when faced with some determined batting. Yes, there were some young players in the side for the 4th Test, but that was in an increasingly desperate attempt to save some face in the series.

cric_J
on December 19, 2012, 7:25 GMT

Guess Cook will break most records if goes on like this . Splendid really!
And although I am more fond of AB ,Matt Prior certainly is one of the most dependable batsman of modern day cricket and a wow keeper.Will be hard for england to replace him when he goes.Not so soon anyway.

158notout
on December 20, 2012, 11:43 GMT

Why so many .5 marks? Surely that makes the grading out of 20 not out of 10. For clarity I have remarked here simply choosing which way to round the .5 marks, I think it looks much fairer:

... echoing the last Ashes tour it is led by Jimmy and Cookie. Both times there really was space for two men of the series. I still think Root is a high mark for 1 Test but otherwise it looks ok.

aka-ra
on December 20, 2012, 10:02 GMT

@Andrew Bell Did you see Cook's decisions in the final test? He wasn't out in either of them. The caught behind missed the edge by a couple of inches!

on December 20, 2012, 8:21 GMT

how can you give 9.5 to someone who made 1 and 13 in the final test?

Meety
on December 20, 2012, 3:15 GMT

Hard to guage much on ratings, they are so subjective, but I would say that Cook had to be pretty close to 10/10. In the 1st test defeat, that 2nd innings (IMO with hindsight), turned the series. What was supposed to be a massive flogging from India - ended up being comfortable rather than a massacre & the momentum was halted. I'd put Panesar above Swann in head to head battles, so being scored even over 4 tests is okay. Dunno how Root & Finn get 7.5s for one match in a 4-test series? I thought Finn's 1st innings bowling was quite loose.
== == ==
Said a few times, 6mths out before this series, I would of said 3-1 India, just because of the alien-like qualities Oz & Eng would consider the conditions to be like. The England planning (Flower & co take a bow), was Ashes-like in its brilliance (except the Panesar no-show in the 1st Test). India were like a boxer who has one punch in them & then nothing. England absorbed it lost the initial round then pummelled India every whichway!

no_point_chasing_the_wide_ones
on December 19, 2012, 17:48 GMT

regards the ABdV vs Prior debate, both average 48.something in test matches since ABdV took over the gloves from Boucher at the beginning of the SA-Eng series in the summer (gbqdgi - check your facts!!!! instead of guessing... and while you're at it, get a proper profile name as apposed to randomly bashing on the keyboard). and based on comments here, most seem to agree AB is a better batsman - overall stats support that. regards glovework I think it is more difficult to categorically state one is better than the other. Prior is a top keeper in top form, but I can't remember AB doing much wrong or making any howlers in the 2 series he has kept. And he has had glowing references from respectable ex-plyers like Healy and Gilchrist. So I don't think it is as clear cut as some of you suggest. I think they are evenly matched as keeper-batsmen, and I certainly know which of them I would pick if selecting a side... the one born in SA!!!! fancy that, 2 best keepers in the world both from SA!

R_U_4_REAL_NICK
on December 19, 2012, 15:48 GMT

It was a great series for England, regardless of the typically laughable scoring at the end of it all. Bowlers are key to tests, so I'm glad to see so many bowlers up there in the top half for a change. Samit Patel was the biggest disappointment for me; he did so well in the warm-ups with both bat and ball, and then floundered in the real deal. Broad should not have even been brought to India, and must have lied or something about his fitness. It's definately looking more positive for England, and I just hope they've learned a lot from this tour and realise that bowlers like Magic Monty are a must in these conditions, REGARDLESS OF BATTING/FIELDING SKILLS!

Valavan
on December 19, 2012, 13:49 GMT

@Dobell, why so much biased Cook,Swann should get 10 and Bresnan 1.5 and Broad 0.5, do you admite Broad and Bresnan. cricinfo please publish

JG2704
on December 19, 2012, 9:29 GMT

@edgie on (December 18 2012, 10:39 AM GMT) How has AB averaged as a batsman in tests when keeping wicket?

@Ali_Chaudhary on (December 18 2012, 10:41 AM GMT) And Ajmal wasn't up to much the last time Pak toured England but does that have any bearing to what he's doing now? The marks are for this series alone - end of

@ ravikb on (December 18 2012, 11:16 AM GMT) Swings and roundabouts. He scored what he scored with one or 2 going for him and a couple going against him so it's kind of levelled itself out don't you think?

CricketingStargazer
on December 19, 2012, 9:19 GMT

Funny thing, @GrindAR, is that that a different tune was being sung during the warm-ups and after the 1st Test. How did India suddenly turn from being a team of superstars who would win 4-0 without breaking sweat into a bunch of neos who were unworthy opponents? I seem to remember seeing most of the same faces in the Indian team through the entire series. I suspect that guys like Sehway, Gambhir, Tendulkar, Dhoni, Yuvraj, Harbhajan, Zaheer, etc would be a bit miffed at the "young and inexperienced" tag and where players were changed it was usually down to players being dropped for poor performances. Similarly, Ravi Ashwin was totted as one of the fastest bowlers ever to 50 Test wickets... it's not England's fault that his ability suddenly deserted him when faced with some determined batting. Yes, there were some young players in the side for the 4th Test, but that was in an increasingly desperate attempt to save some face in the series.

cric_J
on December 19, 2012, 7:25 GMT

Guess Cook will break most records if goes on like this . Splendid really!
And although I am more fond of AB ,Matt Prior certainly is one of the most dependable batsman of modern day cricket and a wow keeper.Will be hard for england to replace him when he goes.Not so soon anyway.

cric_J
on December 19, 2012, 7:20 GMT

Jimmy gets what is also his jersey number.And he deserves it to the core.Although he has really grown as a bowler ,I didn't expect him to be so effective barring in kolkata.But I am delighted to be proven wrong.Just hope he blows away the kiwis and aussies next year and ends the year as world number 1. That list must be fed up of Dale Steyn now !

Mitcher
on December 19, 2012, 6:59 GMT

I 100% agree Anderson has been fantastic. Great to see a quick showing that there is reward for effort/skill even on dead beds.
Equally I don't think England's effort should be underestimated despite the state of Indian side. Winning in India is tough at any time.
I was certainly feeling more confident about Australia's chance in ashes when England were losing this year but still very much looking forward to the biggest series in cricket.
Both teams have had their issues recently and while England will deservedly go in favourites, well, we wouldn't bother watching if the favourites always won.

Kapcharlie
on December 19, 2012, 4:20 GMT

England marks seem a little high, while Indian marks are a little low. But for 2 poor umpiring decisions against Cook the series would likely have ended 3-1. The comments regarding Broad and Bresnan as batsman make no sense. England need another pace/seam bowler not a poor bowler that occasionally scores some runs. Against Australia they will need Finn or an in form Tremlett to bring some hostility to complement Anderson. If the England batsmen are in form it is hard to see Australia being much of a challenge.

Compton - 6 . Compton was too cautious and negative (wouldn't even put the bad ball away), and after long stints when set got out to poor shots. Acumulating 25 off 130 balls is of no value; rather it builds pressure and and gives opposition bowlers confidence. One score above 50 does not deserve a rating of 7.

Bell - 5. One good score in the final test belies woeful performances in the 3 preceediong matches, were Bell contributed virtually nothing with the bat - the manner and mode of the dismissals particulary dreadful. Once again Bell saves his career with one decent innings at the end of a series.

Broad & Bresnan - 2. Very poor, ineffective bowling. Bresnan's times up, let's face it he had a lucky year, but he's not test standard.

on December 19, 2012, 1:47 GMT

Monty should get half a mark over Swann - afterall Monty played one less test. 3 points for Broad are too much (should be 1, similar to Zaheer). Bairstow shouldn't have been rated as all - he batted in 1 innings (where he got a dubious decision) - not enough data to make an assessment. Cook deserved a 10 for this series - he did everything you can expect from an opener; and then he captained the side as well.

Cook 10
Anderson, Monty 9
Peterson, Prior 8.5
Swann 8
...
Broad 1

attilathecricketer
on December 19, 2012, 0:06 GMT

A) Indian marks below what they should, England's above what they should be.
B) Always the bowlers getting harshest marking - Zaheer, Bresnan and Broad when conditions were the hardest for the seam bowlers - usual damn bias

JB77
on December 18, 2012, 23:12 GMT

Bell's score should be a 3 at best. Looked completely out of his depth for most of the series and then he gets in a century at the last minute....on a flat track....when one of his team-mates had already got a ton (seriously - does Bell ever score a ton without one of his teammates scoring one first?). So....if winning the Ashes after 16 years equals MBE's and ticker-tape parades, winning in India after 28 years must mean knighthoods and some sort of team portrait etched on the moon or something?

GrindAR
on December 18, 2012, 22:22 GMT

well said dudos... 1 batsmen and 2 bowlers clicked were sufficient to win the matches on every occasion... what a bragging joke... giving liberal marks shows how false bragging england team/support is.... it shows the win is against a stripped off team, where 90% of the team is new and mostly youngsters is a humongous. Same like you guys bragged winning Ashes against a ridiculously young and like new county team Aussies. Shameless will be apt. Just get out and play your next series against Aussies or India again for that fact, taste of bragging would be sour... how sweat.... for non-english... looking soon

Lmaotsetung
on December 18, 2012, 22:20 GMT

@Roger Butcher - there is a leftie playing for Essex....the kind of seamer every team wish they have...and he's only 19 yrs old. He's on the radar and hasn't been exposed too much in the Lions setup. I'm not worried about finding replacements once Jimmy leaves the game. Tremlette might well make a comeback. I like his attitude and if he has a good start to the new season, he's back in the mix imo. Meaker looks like the next in line, more of a skiddish fast bowler. At least we are seeing the batting talent coming thru which was the one area I was worried about. We have people lining up for Prior's job from Lord's to Chennai but no solid opener or middle order batsmen. Hopefully Eng has unearth a future opener in Root and it looks like they are grooming Bairstow to be the next Eng keeper although Butler is also waiting in the wings. Woakes and Stokes are decent bowling allrounders, probably with more upside than Bresnan and Broad. Future looks good..hope no injuries.

on December 18, 2012, 22:13 GMT

Some of these rankings are very inaccurate. It seems like just because England won the series players like Bell and Finn are getting extremely generous marks. I'm sure if England had lost the series and these two had played the way they did there mark would be much lower. Also think Trott has been overrated by about a mark. Also Broad and Bresnan's marks flatter them and highlights the fact that because England won their players automatically get higher marks regardless of how they played. But having said that agree with the rest of the marks and congrats to Root and Compton who despite not being the best player of the series never looked out of place and certainly looked more composed than the likes of Bell,Bresnan and Broad.

Front-Foot-Lunge
on December 18, 2012, 22:07 GMT

Anderson should really be awarded an 11 for turning the tables on all those fans, especially from India and Pakistan I'm afraid to say, who said he couldn't bowl on flat decks, despite long proving he could. Not only that, he is certainly the best bowler in the world for flat pitches with his variations and great ability to swing it both ways. Ask any of the Australian team. And the Pakistan could have told you that too, given that England fell foul of the then ignorance they had about batting on slow ones and the application of the DRS on them, and lost that tour on their batting. Need I say Anderson's a master on green tops? Nope. Need we question he is anything but a world-leading master on flat-decks? Nope. The world knows that now. And Jimmy certainly deserves to go and have a good Christmas, because he's left a certain part of the world speechless.

A_Vacant_Slip
on December 18, 2012, 21:28 GMT

I am very very VERY happy that England won in the country that has been graveyard for us for sooo many year. A magnificent achievement. As for "grade" "who cares"! We WON!!! After Ahmedhabad I feared the worst but there were at least good sign in Cook making excellent and almost match saving hundred. After that it was like different series with England looking unstoppable. When it is all over I will look forward to reading the book that will inevitably come from the player who were there. Bravo also to ALL faithful England fan who were here - bravo to us all!

big_al_81
on December 18, 2012, 21:20 GMT

@ Kirstenfan. Perhaps you'd like to enlighten us about how many visiting teams in the last, say, 40 years have won 4-0 in India? Few people gave England much hope before this series yet they are the first away team to win a series of any length since the great Aussie side of 2004. I wouldn't argue with how poor Broad was but the other marks are fair enough.
No need to reply at length to edgie as I see several other folks have very eloquently quashed the idea that AB (who we all seem to agree is a very good batsman) is anywhere near to being proven as a wicketkeeper batsman. Great comparison from gbqgjd or whatever he/she's called!

Front-Foot-Lunge
on December 18, 2012, 19:54 GMT

Whilst everyone is fawning over Anderson, and why not if you watched this master of flat pitches shatter the Indian stumps time and again, we must all never forget that his wickets column would be double if chances had be held and if he'd had more luck. No doubt the best fast bowler in he world. Funny to see Australian fans not commenting on him, how they would love to have in their side. Or maybe it just deepens the pain Anderson has left on them after innings defeat after innings defeat both in their own back yard and in England. Good Times for England fans. :)

GHemrajani
on December 18, 2012, 19:50 GMT

why not zero for Broad and Bresnan? And Flower should get minus points for insisting on playing both of them.

landl47
on December 18, 2012, 18:46 GMT

I guess if everything's relative, then these marks are reasonable because they reflect the relative contribution of the various players accurately. If I were marking, Bresnan and Broad would get lower marks and I wouldn't rank Trott above Compton. 2 century partnerships, 2 fifty partnerships (one unbroken) and 1 40-odd are 5 good starts for England out of 8 innings. I'll take that every series.

SDHM
on December 18, 2012, 18:32 GMT

@Roger Butcher - Finn can't last a whole series? This is the first series in which he has picked up any injuries - the reason he hasn't been involved all through others is because England haven't picked him.

SDHM
on December 18, 2012, 18:29 GMT

@Ali_Chaudhary - obviously forgettting Cook's 100 at the Oval vs SA or his two 100s against Ajmal in the ODI series. Anderson also bowled superbly in the UAE. Watch with your eyes, not with your prejudices.

SDHM
on December 18, 2012, 18:25 GMT

If I was being harsh, I'd probably put Compton down a mark - he certainly didn't do much wrong, but often got out once doing all the hard work. One of the things he has done so brilliantly for Somerset over the past 2 seasons is make starts count - once he gets to 40 or 50, he inevitably seems to go on & get a big 100. He made 4 50s on this tour - 1 in the Tests, 3 in the warm ups - & didn't once go on to 3 figures, which is disappointing, & you can guarantee he'll be annoyed with himself about it & desperate to put it right. Certainly deserves to keep his place in NZ (conditions more suited to him definitely) but I'd like to see him go on & bat really deep. I just wonder if what triggered his explosion in form was the drop down from opening to no.3, and therefore if it's worth swapping him & Root around at some point in the near future.

SDHM
on December 18, 2012, 18:18 GMT

@Dr.Vindaloo - disagree completely. ABdV is an excellent batsman who is a decent keeper. Prior is a genuine all-rounder - I ceertainly wouldn't say his keeping is any better than his superb batting. De Villiers is definitely the better batsman of the two, but Prior is the better all-round package.

2.14istherunrate
on December 18, 2012, 18:14 GMT

I have a problem, a very minor problem, but one nonetheless. Why could you not have given KP the same as Swann, Prior and Monty and not given them all the same as Jimmy-9. That just seems the way it has been. Still these minor discrepancies are noithing compared to the rather disparaging marks given to Indian players.Wow! Something is going down there. Hey India,it's not as bad as it might seem.We are just that good at times.

Domzo
on December 18, 2012, 18:09 GMT

@edgie, Personally, I put AB DeVilliers in the same category as Kumar Sangakarra, a world class middle order batsman who happens to keep wicket, rather than a wicketkeeper/batsman. If Boucher hadn't retired under sad circumstances, DeVilliers almost cetainly wouldn't be keeping Wicket for South Africa. If DeVilliers was a regular wicketkeeper, I'd agree. Effectively though, a wicketkeeper/batsman is almost in the all-rounder slot and I'd say Prior is the best at the moment - he'd get into most teams in the world as an all-rounder and, to be honest, he'd probably make several, including England, as a pure lower middle order batsman.

JG2704
on December 18, 2012, 18:04 GMT

Have to say I like the idea of the same journalist doing the rankings for both sides. As rightly says , the Indian marks are compiled by an Indian writer so our man George can't be blamed for their marks. Judging by the respective marks it looks like either our man has gone a little overboard on some of our marks or the Indian man has been a little harsh or a combo of both. From our marks I can't really think why Broad and Bres even deserve anything above 1 or 2.Bell maybe deserves less but 1 unbeaten knock and he suddenly averages 43. Matt had a very decent series with the bat but he did miss a few chances - had we lost might he have been marked down?I'd also rank Jimmy behind both Monty and Swann. Remember Jimmy was very ineffective in the 1st test. Swann has performed with ball and bat and in the last test he came in with Eng on 242-7 and had he got out earlier we may have been 70 runs lighter = less scoreboard pressure for India etc. So I'd go Cook,Swann,Monty,Jimmy as our top 4

on December 18, 2012, 18:01 GMT

A couple in the middle seem a little high. 7 is well above average - and Compton was "just" above average at a "6" I would have thought. Bell was well BELOW average for 2 and a half tests and even with his socre in the 4th surely only just managed to scrape an average "5". As for Broad and Bresnan. This is more of an issue for England. These are the two seamers who can bat, but both are 6-8 MPH down on pace, lacking direction and swing (or seam) and just not the bowlers they were even 10 months ago. As 9 and 10 they bolstered the batting tail a great deal - something Onions, Finn, Tremlett etc do not do.

on December 18, 2012, 17:45 GMT

how on earth can bell be ratd 6 . i think a 3 o 4 shud suit him mor . man played like a novice ,.

JG2704
on December 18, 2012, 17:34 GMT

@edgie on (December 18 2012, 10:39 AM GMT) How has AB averaged as a batsman in tests when keeping wicket?

@Ali_Chaudhary on (December 18 2012, 10:41 AM GMT) And Ajmal wasn't up to much the last time Pak toured England but does that have any bearing to what he's doing now? The marks are for this series alone - end of

phoenixsteve
on December 18, 2012, 16:48 GMT

Pretty good assessment George although it's hard to see how Cook could get that elusive 10? His failures were down to poor umpiring. Personally I think there;s a case for everybody getting 10 - such was the crushing nature of this historic win! Oh... and I can just hear the deluded iNDIAN FANS COMPLAINING about the ratings given to Tendulkar and Khan! Who cares? They are part of a very poor losing side and both of them (including some others) should retire and apologise to Indiia for exceeding their 'best by' dates! Tendulkar might be given an honor in the Queens New Years list "for services to Cricket" .... question is for services to English cricket or Indian cricket? ODIs and T20 next... bring it on! COME ON ENGLAND!!!

Dr.Vindaloo
on December 18, 2012, 15:49 GMT

Edgie - De Villiers is a world class test batsman who happens to be a very useful wicket-keeper. Prior is a world class wicket-keeper who happens to be a very useful batsman. Depends on the balance of your team which one you would want to select.

mikey76
on December 18, 2012, 15:22 GMT

@Roger Butcher. We have the likes of Meaker, Roland-Jones, Topley and Harris who have yet to play at the highest level. Then we have guys like the Overton twins who are a few years away but look promising. Woakes and Stokes are all rounders worth looking at too. Plenty of fast bowling talent coming through, in 4-5 years time I would expect to see Finn, Meaker, Topley and Kerrigan with Stokes at 6.

Rastus
on December 18, 2012, 14:51 GMT

Samit Patel - It is hard to imagine a scenario where he will play Test cricket again.
LOLOLOLOL - Poor old Samit - If he reads that article he will probably start to pile the pounds on again

Harlequin.
on December 18, 2012, 14:47 GMT

also ravikb, the marks were given by two different journalists, which would explain why the scores don't match up (if you want me to explain the concept of calibration to you, I'd be happy to), and it was an Indian journalist who gave Statchin such a low mark, not an English journalist.

Harlequin.
on December 18, 2012, 14:42 GMT

@ravikb - really getting a little sick of Indians complaining about the fact that Cook went on to score those runs when he should have been given out. Let me make this nice and simple for you: Your team decided not to have DRS, so your team must accept faulty decisions.

gbqdgj
on December 18, 2012, 14:24 GMT

@edgie....errr no...ABV...brilliant batsman...when not keeping. His performance with the gloves has been pretty good but not in the same class as Prior's and when keeping, his batting average is well below Prio's...so check your facts!! BTW...IMO... ABV at his best is one of the most pleasing batsmen in the world to watch and my only complaint would be that he isn't English (sadly) so I have nothing against him but just wish SA would go with a specialist keeper and let him concentrate on batting.

Kirstenfan
on December 18, 2012, 14:23 GMT

These marks are ridiculous - England won 2-1 and not 4-0! If you compare the ratings it looks like Aus v bangladesh in the old days. Bell, trott deserved no more than 5

Finn - 1 test, still kicks the stumps like an amateur schoolboy.

If tendulkar gets 1 and khan 2 why should broad get 3? Broad should have 0, and so should bresnn, because they're bowlers and that was how many wickets they got

Ross_Co
on December 18, 2012, 13:51 GMT

Ridiculous. Really the same person (or better still persons) should be rating both teams. Whence the 3 points for Broad for instance - being blond? Turning up? Not using Twitter?

@Shabih Afridi on (December 18 2012, 11:41 AM GMT), um, there are two different people rating the two teams and they are not using exactly the same criteria. Scores for England players can only be compared directly to scores for other England players and Indian players with other Indian players. That's why they appear in two different articles. Far too many people want to start wailing and waving their arms rather than apply a bit of brain power. There is no slight against India here but you can use that perception as a way to deflect your attention from the series result if you want.

on December 18, 2012, 13:17 GMT

For those of you who are complaining about some marks being too low or too high in comparison to the India marks, take into account that the two teams are marked by different people - they are merely subjective.

@edgie - I agree that AB de Villiers is a better batsman than Prior, but the question was: Is Prior the best WICKETKEEPER-batsman in Tests. The glovework takes precedence in any fair appraisal of a stumpman as this is his primary job, and in that respect the immensely-improved Prior is widely regarded as the best, certainly head-and-shoulders ahead of the hapless MS Dhoni. AB de Villiers is a great batsman but a makeshift wicketkeeper from what I've seen.

on December 18, 2012, 13:08 GMT

Ian bell showing up at the end of the party probably doesn't warrant his score but it takes a lot to bat time in such a situation so that performance shouldn't be underestimated. 7.5 for that performance, about 1.5 for the rest of the series.

Good to see compton get some credit. Opening is all about partnerships. Hopefully he will get some credit from this and be given the time to develop what looks to be a promising opening pair.

bonobo
on December 18, 2012, 12:59 GMT

slightly over the top, like whenver England have something to celebrate, but still lets not crow, great team performance. Cook was a legend, Prior and Anderson great team players. Swann and Panesar showed the benefit of experience, patence and orthodoxy compared to the Indians. Pietersen role really is that of impact player this current lineup and impact he did when it mattered. Bell and Patek had contrasting fortunes, one looked a mess, but took his chance at the right time, one always looked good, but didnt know how to continue, cant see when he will play again. Compton, I have some doubts about, nott sure he can be more than a 6, really solid, but turgid, with him Cook and Trott, it will put a lot of pressure on the lower middle order to take risks, socre quickly and get England to winning scores, with time left

on December 18, 2012, 12:39 GMT

Hey George, I was just wondering if these marks and the India marks were put together collaboratively. Because I think it would probably make more sense for one person to do all the marks as then it gives a more consistent view. Or perhaps you could both do all the marks, for your different articles. I mean, Broad getting 3 and Zaheer Khan getting 1 is slightly unfair on Zaheer really, would you have given Zaheer 1?????

Charlie101
on December 18, 2012, 12:30 GMT

I think the reason Zaheer Khan was marked so low was because he was completely disinterested in the tests and did not make an effort with fielding or batting - if ever a player deserved to be dropped it was him. I agree with the posts which query Bell's score of 6 being high - hopefully with Bairstow and Root snapping at his heels he will knuckle down and start hitting decent scores again.

@edgie - compare the keeping of Prior to AB . I agree AB is one of the finest batsman in the world but the article mentioned test wicket keeper batsman and the jury is still out on AB's keeping in tests.

on December 18, 2012, 12:28 GMT

Some of these marks are a bit silly, too generous. I assume those who gave them didn't consult with whoever gave the Indian marks because they are wildly inconsistent, in particular with regard to Pujara, who on this scale should get at least an 8. But I think it's better to move in the downward direction (on the general principle that if you give someone a 10 then there is nowhere to go!) So I would give Cook a 9 (marking him down for not going for the win hard enough in 4th test), Andersen and Pietersen 8.5 (yes, I think KP is the only one marked too LOW here: his magnificent ton changed the series), likewise Prior Swann and Panesar all 8, Root stays on 7 (as it was a terrific debut of great maturity - but then Pujara should get 8), Finn, Compton and Trott 6.5, the rest OK except Bell should be no more than 4.5 and Broad should be a fat zero, which he was, sorry.

jb633
on December 18, 2012, 12:10 GMT

Can't say I agree with a lot of these marks. Ian Bell scored one 100 on an absolute featherbed in the last innings but was woeful up till that point. Jimmy Anderson had an innocious first/ second test and deserved a 7.5 IMO. Broad does not actually deserve to be graded such was his no show throughout the whole series.
@Ali_Chaudhary- you definitley seem to know your cricket. Anderson was exemplorary in Dubai but was let down by the batsmen. And out of interest when was the last time Pakistan beat India in India. Looking forward to watching SA demolish your one trick pony side this winter. Ajmal will go wicketless.

DustBowl
on December 18, 2012, 11:59 GMT

A very fair article. Captain Cook! He led from the front with that tough 2nd innings in the first test. Surely that inspired the team, plus the inclusion of Panesar, to the heights of the remaining games. Learns very quickly.
Whilst Anderson may lack the 'potency' of Steyn, arguably the latter only came to the party for one test against the Aussies. Anderson was always there for his captain.
Prior, "Selfless and reliable", perhaps deserves another 0.5 point. Should be vice captain permanently?
Broad NOT "selfless and reliable", surely 3 is generous, as is Bell's 6, who did not get out on only an appallingly flat pitch.

on December 18, 2012, 11:56 GMT

England need to unearth another couple of seamers to add to the stable. For one reason or another, Broad, Bresnan, Finn and Tremlett can't be relied upon to last for a whole series. There is Onions, but not much after that.

on December 18, 2012, 11:41 GMT

3.5 and 3 to Bresnan and Broad, and 1 to Zaheer, what a joke.

Jimmers
on December 18, 2012, 11:23 GMT

About 4 points too high for Broad - agree with the rest

npc_cricketlover
on December 18, 2012, 11:20 GMT

the ratings looked good in the beginning but turned out to be horrible at the end...
Broad didnt even deserve 2 marks, and ian bell deserved nothing more than 4.5. Just one century at the tad end of the series is not sufficient.

sachin_vvsfan
on December 18, 2012, 11:17 GMT

4.5 for samit patel and 4 for R ashwin (im not fan of ashwin but he did well with bat compared to other lower order batsmen/bowler). and 7/7.5 for the likes of root and compton . Rankings do not give clear picture. Fact is ENG middle order hasn't been really tested (although i agree they deserve to win the series) . It was all about cook/kp/monty and partly anderson/prior through out the series who are good enough for india.

ravikb
on December 18, 2012, 11:16 GMT

What has Stuart Broad and Bresnan done to get 3 and 3.5 points respectively? Atleast Sachin scored one good innings but still got only 2. Is it because England have won the series? Bell played just one innings and got 6 where as he was woefully out of sorts in the other innings on very good batting tracks. Regarding Cook, Dobell is talking about only the poor decisions against him but what about the decisions in Ahmedabad and Mumbai that went in favor of him? If he had been given out in Ahmedabad when he was on 41 (he went onto score 176 that gave confidence to the rest of the team from next test onwards), who knows what would have been the outcome of the series? Typical English journalism.

Nutcutlet
on December 18, 2012, 11:08 GMT

Difficult to argue with these marks. Ian Bell is perhaps lucky to get 6. If there were another tour to the subcontinent next winter, I don't think he would be selected. Although I agree that Samit has almost certainly played his last Test, I do see him as a good team man & tourist. I hope he does really well in the ODIs as his future lies in that direction, IMO. His tour has one special highlight, that speedy chase to the mid-wicket boundary, slide & flick back that did for Sehwag combined with Finn's fast, accurate return. In a sense, that moment summarised a good deal about the series. England's fitness paying off (with its most challenged player too!) the team work that England rightly emphasizes & the ponderous nature of the Indian players in comparison. Had Sehwag been as fit as Samit.. No, no, that is fantasy! ;-) Above all else, Eng has found a gem of a Captain & he scores a few runs too! Oh, BCCI, a note for you: Eng players work v hard for their success - they max the talent!

Lmaotsetung
on December 18, 2012, 10:42 GMT

I think as England fans, we've been spoiled by their performances in the Ashes series of 2010-11 and to a lesser extent against India last year. Everyone was scoring centuries and double tons left and right and it was suddenly regarded as the norm rather than the team playing out of their skin during that period. With the way this tour ended, I'm happy with the overall batting performances. Feel sorry for Samit Patel but I guess there will always be a place for him in the limited overs potion of the team. He's fielded very well for someone who gets yelled at constantly and his effort and commitment to physical fitness at his own expense was top class. Root and Bairstow are the future for sure as well as Finn (if he can stay healthy). I think in a couple years when the next generation of spinners comes in the likes of Kerrigan, Briggs, Borthwick, Dockrell, we'll wish Monty and Swann would still be playing.

Ali_Chaudhary
on December 18, 2012, 10:41 GMT

good performance by england but not great. These andersons and cooks were passenger against us in dubai and against Saffies at home. Cook who is now bieng labelled a great couldnt even face a complete over of ajmal or styn. Anderson couldnt even bowl a dot boll to amla n kallis.

edgie
on December 18, 2012, 10:39 GMT

err yes there is a better batsman-keeper at the moment, george dobell, he is AB deVillers, sure you heard about him helping the Proteas secure the draw of the second test against the Aussies, and scored one of the fastest 150's against Aus in the third test.. check your facts...

Faizan_Bahadur
on December 18, 2012, 10:26 GMT

What has Stuart Broad done to get even the 3 points????

o-bomb
on December 18, 2012, 9:55 GMT

This has been a fantastic win for England and Cook has lead the team like a genius. Our spinners outbowled theirs considerably and both Jimmy and Matt Prior were brilliant. Also KP's innings at Mumbai was as good an innings as he's ever played. However we were playing a poor and unmotivated Indian team and we shouldn't get carried away. There are still some sizeable flaws here. I think the mark of 6 for Ian Bell is generous as he only performed in 1 out of 3 tests. Also Bresnan and Broad played 4 matches between them and contributed next to nothing in that time. All in all thought his has been a thoroughly positive tour for England. I look forward to the New Zealand tour in the new year.

No featured comments at the moment.

o-bomb
on December 18, 2012, 9:55 GMT

This has been a fantastic win for England and Cook has lead the team like a genius. Our spinners outbowled theirs considerably and both Jimmy and Matt Prior were brilliant. Also KP's innings at Mumbai was as good an innings as he's ever played. However we were playing a poor and unmotivated Indian team and we shouldn't get carried away. There are still some sizeable flaws here. I think the mark of 6 for Ian Bell is generous as he only performed in 1 out of 3 tests. Also Bresnan and Broad played 4 matches between them and contributed next to nothing in that time. All in all thought his has been a thoroughly positive tour for England. I look forward to the New Zealand tour in the new year.

Faizan_Bahadur
on December 18, 2012, 10:26 GMT

What has Stuart Broad done to get even the 3 points????

edgie
on December 18, 2012, 10:39 GMT

err yes there is a better batsman-keeper at the moment, george dobell, he is AB deVillers, sure you heard about him helping the Proteas secure the draw of the second test against the Aussies, and scored one of the fastest 150's against Aus in the third test.. check your facts...

Ali_Chaudhary
on December 18, 2012, 10:41 GMT

good performance by england but not great. These andersons and cooks were passenger against us in dubai and against Saffies at home. Cook who is now bieng labelled a great couldnt even face a complete over of ajmal or styn. Anderson couldnt even bowl a dot boll to amla n kallis.

Lmaotsetung
on December 18, 2012, 10:42 GMT

I think as England fans, we've been spoiled by their performances in the Ashes series of 2010-11 and to a lesser extent against India last year. Everyone was scoring centuries and double tons left and right and it was suddenly regarded as the norm rather than the team playing out of their skin during that period. With the way this tour ended, I'm happy with the overall batting performances. Feel sorry for Samit Patel but I guess there will always be a place for him in the limited overs potion of the team. He's fielded very well for someone who gets yelled at constantly and his effort and commitment to physical fitness at his own expense was top class. Root and Bairstow are the future for sure as well as Finn (if he can stay healthy). I think in a couple years when the next generation of spinners comes in the likes of Kerrigan, Briggs, Borthwick, Dockrell, we'll wish Monty and Swann would still be playing.

Nutcutlet
on December 18, 2012, 11:08 GMT

Difficult to argue with these marks. Ian Bell is perhaps lucky to get 6. If there were another tour to the subcontinent next winter, I don't think he would be selected. Although I agree that Samit has almost certainly played his last Test, I do see him as a good team man & tourist. I hope he does really well in the ODIs as his future lies in that direction, IMO. His tour has one special highlight, that speedy chase to the mid-wicket boundary, slide & flick back that did for Sehwag combined with Finn's fast, accurate return. In a sense, that moment summarised a good deal about the series. England's fitness paying off (with its most challenged player too!) the team work that England rightly emphasizes & the ponderous nature of the Indian players in comparison. Had Sehwag been as fit as Samit.. No, no, that is fantasy! ;-) Above all else, Eng has found a gem of a Captain & he scores a few runs too! Oh, BCCI, a note for you: Eng players work v hard for their success - they max the talent!

ravikb
on December 18, 2012, 11:16 GMT

What has Stuart Broad and Bresnan done to get 3 and 3.5 points respectively? Atleast Sachin scored one good innings but still got only 2. Is it because England have won the series? Bell played just one innings and got 6 where as he was woefully out of sorts in the other innings on very good batting tracks. Regarding Cook, Dobell is talking about only the poor decisions against him but what about the decisions in Ahmedabad and Mumbai that went in favor of him? If he had been given out in Ahmedabad when he was on 41 (he went onto score 176 that gave confidence to the rest of the team from next test onwards), who knows what would have been the outcome of the series? Typical English journalism.

sachin_vvsfan
on December 18, 2012, 11:17 GMT

4.5 for samit patel and 4 for R ashwin (im not fan of ashwin but he did well with bat compared to other lower order batsmen/bowler). and 7/7.5 for the likes of root and compton . Rankings do not give clear picture. Fact is ENG middle order hasn't been really tested (although i agree they deserve to win the series) . It was all about cook/kp/monty and partly anderson/prior through out the series who are good enough for india.

npc_cricketlover
on December 18, 2012, 11:20 GMT

the ratings looked good in the beginning but turned out to be horrible at the end...
Broad didnt even deserve 2 marks, and ian bell deserved nothing more than 4.5. Just one century at the tad end of the series is not sufficient.